Results 361 - 380 of 2277
|
||||||
Results from: Answers On or After: Thu 12/31/70 Author: Hank Ordered by Verse |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
361 | killing animals (squirls) on purpose | Bible general Archive 2 | Hank | 155455 | ||
Yes, that's quite possible. | ||||||
362 | Locate verse not repaying evil for evil | Bible general Archive 2 | Hank | 155761 | ||
Duplicate question. | ||||||
363 | resurrection of Christ and prayer | Bible general Archive 2 | Hank | 155895 | ||
FBW, Biblical numerology, if we may call it such, usually calls for much speculation and leads us places we should not go, i.e., into the dark, satanic world of occultism. .... By the way, the word "fifty" appears 87 times in the NAS Bible. Use the "Get Bible Text" search engine on the right of your screen. You may be able to see some sort of special signicance in this number in Scripture, but I certainly can't. --Hank | ||||||
364 | Was Jesus a Jew? | Bible general Archive 2 | Hank | 156332 | ||
Yes, and yes. | ||||||
365 | Fasting | Bible general Archive 2 | Hank | 156347 | ||
Mike, the Forum archives contain dozens of entries on fasting. Type the word fasting in the search box on the upper right of your screen. --Hank | ||||||
366 | Is there an age of accountability? | Bible general Archive 2 | Hank | 156544 | ||
cjsmithy: Thanks for your question and welcome to you. There may be such a thing as "an age" of accountability to God, but it is better expressed if we call it a "state" of accountability, or a time in one's growth process at which he becomes accountable (responsibile) for what he thinks, says, and does. Obviously this "turning point" differs from one individual to another and may never be reached at all by persons who suffer from severe retardation or other traumatic and pronounced loss of mental acumen. But to fix the "age of accountability" -- e.g. at 12 years of age -- arbitrarily is very wrong. There are some good thoughts -- and not-so-good! -- on this subject available to you in the Forum archives, which you may view by going to Search and in the box typing in the single word, accountability. --Hank | ||||||
367 | Is there an age of accountability? | Bible general Archive 2 | Hank | 156546 | ||
Duplicate question. | ||||||
368 | co dependecy | Bible general Archive 2 | Hank | 156748 | ||
allmychildren, your question calls for a kind of subjective and personal response for which this Forum is neither designed nor equipped to handle. It is suggested that you seek counsel and advice from qualified persons within your community. --Hank | ||||||
369 | co dependecy | Bible general Archive 2 | Hank | 156749 | ||
allmychildren, your question calls for a kind of subjective and personal response for which this Forum is neither designed nor equipped to handle. It is suggested that you seek counsel and advice from qualified persons within your community. --Hank | ||||||
370 | co dependecy | Bible general Archive 2 | Hank | 156751 | ||
allmychildren, your question calls for a kind of subjective and personal response for which this Forum is neither designed nor equipped to handle. It is suggested that you seek counsel and advice from qualified persons within your community. --Hank | ||||||
371 | how do jesus feel about an enabler | Bible general Archive 2 | Hank | 156753 | ||
allmychildren, please clarify your question. What do you mean by "enabler"? --Hank | ||||||
372 | how do jesus feel about an enabler | Bible general Archive 2 | Hank | 156755 | ||
Duplication. | ||||||
373 | Needing info on how the socio-political | Bible general Archive 2 | Hank | 156788 | ||
Rozaren, this begs the question, Is the word of the Lord proactive or reactive in history? Your question seems to be premised on the latter, but Scripture does not support this view. I have no way of knowing where your question originated, but it sounds to me like it could have come from the secular world view of a political science textbook. Since this IS a Bible-study Forum, I'll recommend a very reliable bibliography to you. It's a group of 66 books, all by the same Author, beginning with the Book of Genesis and ending with the Book of Revelation, frequently bound together in one large volume called The Bible. --Hank | ||||||
374 | Apostles4-2day | Bible general Archive 1 | Hank | 2442 | ||
At first glance your user name, RCSCROLL, set me aback. I read it as RCSPROUL, the well-known apologist for the faith and theologian of some renown! Your question is a complex one, if only because the definitions of apostle and prophet are incredibly complex. Scholars differ widely on their definitions. In the strictest Biblical sense, an apostle is generally a person who witnessed the Risen Lord and who was sent out with authority (which is what the word apostle actually means) as a messenger to proclaim the gospel. Matthew (10:1-5) uses the terms disciples and apostles interchangeably when speaking of the calling of the Twelve. Luke in Acts extends the title apostle beyond the Twelve. And Paul calls himself an apostle of Jesus Christ in the greeting of virtually every letter he wrote that we have in the New Testament canon. In light of the scriptural record, therefore, it is difficult to see how anyone living today could be called an apostle -- not, at any rate, in the Biblical sense.Prophets. Do they exist today? Yes, they do and Scripture supports this view, particularly the existence of false prophets. Jesus issued a stern warning to beware of false prophets and false Christs (Matt. 7:15; Mark 13:22) Paul referred to genuine prophecy as a gift in 1 Cor. 13:2. Prophecy simply means "spokesman for God" and does not always entail the foretelling of future events. The Old Testament is replete with instances in which the prophets spoke to Israel a message from God that had to do with current events here and now and nothing at all about the future."Beloved," said John (1 John 4:1) "do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God, because many false prophets have gone out into the world."It would appear that we are running well above quota almost 2000 years later. I'm keenly aware that in this poor attempt to answer your question I have not even begun to skim the surface. But your subject matter, as I said at the outset, is a complex one. At the risk of appearing to play the pedant, I'll venture a pair of suggestions. Consult entries for apostles, disciples, and prophets in a good Bible dictionary. I like Holman's. That will give you a fairly broad background on the subjects. Next, run the Scripture references provided by an exhaustive concordance. I use NASB. The concordance will allow you to do what amounts to an inductive study of these subjects, wherein you allow Scripture to interpret Scripture. I think there is nothing on earth that takes the place of searching the Scriptures for ourselves. It means digging, and digging is had work any way you slice it. But the nuggets to be found, and found in abundance, are without price. | ||||||
375 | Holman Bible: Critical or Majority Text? | Bible general Archive 1 | Hank | 2546 | ||
Good question, Chris! And wouldn't you know -- I just happen to have the answer straight from the Holman's mouth, as it were. The textual base for the New Testament is the Nestle-Aland Novum Testamentum Graece, 27th edition,and the United Bible Societies' Greeek New Testament, 4th corrected edition. Footnotes immediately below the text indicate significant differences among Greek manuscripts of the NT. In a few cases, brackets are used to indicate texts that are omitted in some ancient Greek manuscripts. Here's another item of some interest I gleaned from the Introduction. Under the heading TRANSLATION PHILOSOPHY they review two philosophies that are old hat to most of us, i.e., formal equivalence (word for word) and dynamic equivalence (thought for thought). Then they expose us to a third translation philosophy -- the one they subscribed for this translation -- which they call Optimal Equivalence and define it thusly: "This method seeks to combine the best features of both formal and dynamic equivalence by applying each method to tranlsate the meaning of the original with optimal accuracy." They continue for several more lines of exposition, but what I've cited constitutes the real kernel of their concept. Is this -- this Optimal Equivalence -- really a new concept? Or is it, in the words of that great language master, Yogi Berra, deja vu all over again? | ||||||
376 | Did the Amplified come from Wescott and | Bible general Archive 1 | Hank | 2599 | ||
The Amplified Bible is the fruition of the life work of Frances Siewert who died in 1967 at the ripe old age of 86. This woman had a keen interest in the Scriptures and devoted her life to the study of Biblical languages, customs, archeology of the Holy Land and so forth. I am not aware that the Amplfied is a knock-off of ASV, NASB, or any other version. Having just now re-read the introduction to this translation, I get the real sense that she tended to be eclectic in her sources. Anyone with but a nodding aquaintance with the Amplified could likely be persuaded that Frances in all probability owned a well-worn Roget's. The Lockman Foundation set up an editorial board to carefully review Mrs. Siewert's work and, in a joint effort with Zondervan Publishing House, issued the Amplified New Testament in 1958, the one-volume Amplified Bible in 1965. I find the Amplified useful in aiding in the clarification of a troublesome locution here and there, but I find it ponderous to read large portions of it at one sitting. It hardly lends itself to public reading. In summation, it can be fairly noted that this work is, in the main, the work of one person, albeit with a little help from her friends. There are those, I among them, who feel uncomfortable with any translation so conceived and executed. Sorry I couldn't speak more to your point, but I hope this helps a little. | ||||||
377 | Did you know we did it? | Bible general Archive 1 | Hank | 3082 | ||
JVH, I hereby nominate you Official Statistician for the Forum! Thanks for the good news; I feel certain many other users join in on the Hallelujah Chorus. Now let's prepare for a quantum leap from one thousand to one million. The possibilities of this Forum are vast. Who knows but that something someone says here will bring a precious soul to a saving knowledge of our Lord. I pray that this will happen. ... By the way, would you mind making my grape juice purple? Hank | ||||||
378 | Which Bible versions to stay away from? | Bible general Archive 1 | Hank | 3268 | ||
Nolen, I think you are right that it would probably be imprudent to list by name some of the more, shall we say?, non-orthodox renderings of the sacred text. However, some broad-spectrum guidelines that I follow and have outlined elsewhere on the Forum are these: Is this a translation or merely a paraphrased version? Has the translation been made mainly by one person? Is the translation made by and largely for a definable sect or cult? What philosophy of translating Scripture did (or do) the translators subscribe to? Are the translators on record as believers that the sacred text is the plenary, verbal and infallible word of God? Is the product of what they have done rendered in accordance with standard English usage, and is it grammatically correct? Does it honor and revere God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit? If a version can pass muster on all these points, I applaud it. If it can't I walk away from it. | ||||||
379 | Do we always have to debate? | Bible general Archive 1 | Hank | 3321 | ||
Mr. EdB, before I attempt to post a response to anyone's question or concern, I always examine the previous postings (if any) of that person and read his or her profile if it exists. I have looked at your postings (would you consider doing a profile?) and you strike me as an honest, conscientious Christian (it should suffice to say Christian and leave off the adjectives, but these days perhaps the qualifiers are warranted) and someone worth knowing. What you have to say shows the earmarks of having been well thought out before you post it on the Forum. It is clear from your writings that you have concerns about the Forum and you are by no means alone. It can be improved and I believe in time it will be. This is an experimental enterprise for Lockman and for us, the users. The Forum is in but its second month and we are all of us trying to grope our way and find our stride, as it were. Some sort of monitoring may indeed be the way we should go. One does have the tendency on occasion to ask "Who's in charge here?" But a monitor, or leader, or moderator -- take you pick -- would face a serious problem of logistics, it seems to me. What I mean by that is this: We can never quite hope to duplicate on the Web the warm, close and immediate inter-action between human beings that is possible in a classroom or seminar setting. There may, for example, be a lapse time of several hours or even a couple of days between the asking of a question and a response to it. Moreover, we know next to nothing about each other on this Forum. There is little way to divine what may be behind a question, for example. Is the questioner posing an honest question or he is trying to be cute or funny or tricky. Is he seeking the truth of God's word or merely playing games? Similiar questions could be asked of the respondents. Do they know what they are talking about? Are their answers soundly based on Scripture and is their response a reasonable exegesis of the Biblical text, or is it indeed based on nothing more than their own "spin"? Is this Forum being used by some, not to promote the understanding of God's word, but to promote instead one's own bias or private agenda of some sort? These are tough questions but they need to be addressed and dealt with if this Forum matures to the status of becoming a source for sound, reliable information and exegesis on the Bible. The Lockman Foundation is a paradigm for accuracy in translating the Bible and for showing deep reverence for its Author. In like manner, all we say here should be as accurate as we can make it -- and as reverent. EdB, I am in your debt, sir. Your thought has indeed been a catalyst for mine. Hank. | ||||||
380 | What is the Holy Spirit? | Bible general Archive 1 | Hank | 3662 | ||
Al, in orthodox Christian theology the Holy Spirit is the third Person of the Trinity, and being a Person, not a thing, personal pronouns like Who (not what) and He (not it) are used in reference to Him. It is through the Holy Spirit that God acts, reveals, empowers and discloses His presence. The Holy Spirit was present at creation (Gen. 1:2), at Jesus' baptism (Lk.3:22), on the day of Pentecost (Acts 2:4) that marked the birth of the church. These are but three of numerous accounts throughout the Bible of the manifestation of the Holy Spirit. All of the apostolic writers bear clear witness to the reality of the Holy Spirit in the church. The apostle Paul, above all others, gives us the most profound theological insights on the nature and function of the Holy Spirit. See Romans 8; 1 Corinthians 2, 12, 13, 14); 2 Corinthians 3; and Galatians 5. .... Closely allied to and part of the doctrine of the Holy Spirit is the distinctive Christian doctrine of the Trinity, a theological term used to define God as being in His nature threefold -- God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit. Attempts have been made to explain this concept in terms that the finite human mind can grasp. None have been quite adequate nor can they be, because God is transcendent, meaning that there is none like Him and therefore we can never say with definitiveness, God is like this or like that." God is God. He Himself said in response to Moses' request for the name of the God of the patriarchs "I AM WHO I AM." (Exodus 3:14). One illustration that has been offered in an attempt to help us understand the nature of the Trinity is this: A man is a father to his children. He is a son to his parents. He is a husband to his wife. He is the same man, he is one person, but he is viewed differently by, and plays different roles in the lives of, his children, his parents and his wife. This illustration falls far short of explanation of the Trinity, but perhaps it serves to open a small window to give us a pale, dim view into the mysteries of the Trinity. Paul's fine words in 1 Corinthians 13:12 reflect the human condition in which we all of us find ourselves, "For now we see in a mirror dimly...now I know in part, but then I will know fully..." ... The "nenowned theologian" to whom you refer as stating that the three (persons of the Godhead) are separate and distinct appears as if he may be espousing tritheism, one of two (unitarianism being the other) doctrines of the Trinity that are viewed as flawed and unorthodox. The orthodox view of the Trinity attempts to balance the concepts of unity and distinctiveness, that is, that God is one as the Shema affirms in Deut. 6:4: "Hear, O Israel! the LORD is our God, the LORD is one!" While that is true, God is one, he nonetheless manifests Himself as Father, Son, and Holy Spirit -- three in one, three yet one, the triune God. Tritheism, on the other hand, stresses the distinctive nature of the Godhead to the point at which the Trinity is seen as three separate Gods, which amounts to a Christian polytheism. Unitarianism by contrast focuses exclusively on the concept of God the Father, thus relegating the Son and Holy Spirit to a lower category and made less than divine. Hank. | ||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 ] Next > Last [114] >> |